Touro to...some other place in NY

I'm at Touro now (yea, I know), but I finished in the top 10% pretty easily and I have been accepted by BLS as a transfer. However, I already have 20k off at Touro and I'm confident they will offer me more. Add to that the fact that while at Touro I can live with my parents, roughly saving me 10k to 15k a year.

So the question is, is it better to stay at Touro paying almost 40k less a year and have a solid chance at finishing in the top 10%; or is it better to switch over to Brooklyn and pay more and be in a more competitive atmosphere.

As far as the peripheral issues go, I don't particularly like Touro's school location or the "campus" atmosphere. I would really like to live in Brooklyn / be closer to the city / take part in the school's clinics, but I am scared of incurring massive amounts of debt. Input would be much appreciated.

Yea that seems on point. I don't think Touro is some awful place my mentoring attorney at my summer job went there and he was AWESOME! If you finish in the top 10% with minimal debt I would say you are in a pretty good spot. Take into account the considerable debt you will take on by not being able to live with your parents and paying full tuition to go to Brooklyn Law School right? Not sure if you mean Boston Law School or Brooklyn Law School by your post, but the same logic applies to either one. Boston Law School is far from the best school in it's own market their is a school you might have heard of called Harvard in the area. In Boston I believe there is Boston College, NorthEastern, Suffolk, which are comparable schools and Harvard takes the cake in your own market so you can pay 100k more to be in fourth in your own market.

If Brooklyn Law School is what you are considering the same logic applies. I believe Brooklyn Law School has the highest tuition of any law school and it is in Bedstuy, which is ghetto I lived one subway stop from it and the facilities area not impressive. You will be in competition with NYU, Colombia, Fordham, Cardozo, then I guess Brooklyn woudl be fifth and NYLS, Pace, are in the discussion as well.

Read the below articles directly from the LSAC website condeming the rankings. Don't pay 100K plus more to go to the 5th best school in a market. If you wanted to be in Idaho then University of Idaho regardless of ranking is great, but going to a school that is fifth in it's own market is not going to open many more doors. At least in my opinion and it is certainly is not worth paying living expenses for two years and a highly increased tuition.

The View of Administrators Directly from the LSAC website. http://www.lsac.org/LsacResources/Research/GR/GR-07-02.pdf page this text is on page 7. The first 7 pages explain the incomprehensible formula U.S. News uses, but read the below few paragraphs and I think you will get an understanding of how irrelavnt these rankings are.

Before reporting our findings, we briefly describe the range of opinions people express about rankings. The vastmajority of administrators we interviewed held negative views of rankings: Most believed that rankings were moreharmful than beneficial to their particular schools as well as to legal education generally. This result was not surprisingconsidering that for each of the past 10 years nearly every law school dean (173 of 181 deans of accredited law schoolsin 2005—a typical proportion in the 4 years we have kept track of these numbers) signed a letter publicly condemningthe rankings. This letter, sent to every student who registers to take the LSAT, questions the quality of informationprovided by USN, alleging that the rankings cannot take each student’s “special needs and circumstances into account”and fail to measure many factors that students claim are most important in their choice of law school. These omissionsinclude measures of the quality and accessibility of teachers, faculty scholarship, racial and gender diversity within thefaculty and student body, the size of first-year classes, the strength of alumni networks, student satisfaction with their8education, and cost.11 This letter summarizes one common criticism of ranking methodology: that USN fails to measuremany important attributes that constitute a quality law school.

A second common methodological criticism is that the measures used by USN to estimate law school quality are badproxies for the actual quality of the schools. Klein and Hamilton (1998) conclude, for example, that 90% of the overalldifferences in ranks among schools can be explained by the median LSAT score of their entering classes; this findingsuggests that despite their stated weights, the numerous other factors that comprise the rankings have small effects.12Many deans criticize the quality of USN measures. To take one example, many suggest that respondents to thereputational surveys are ill-informed about the schools they evaluate and that their evaluations are strategic responses. Asone dean put it:The data on the reputational survey are so bad … I don’t understand how you get anything other than someconsensus… There is clear consensus of the 10 or 12 schools that should get a five [where five is “outstanding”and one is “marginal”]. How is there any difference between Chicago and Yale based on reputation? Anyonewho doesn’t put Yale, Harvard, Chicago, Michigan, NU, or Berkeley as a five, is either being instrumental or isan idiot.Lempert (2001) characterizes the USN rankings as “pseudoscience” and, examining each component, characterizes everyfactor used by USN as flawed.Early public assessments of the rankings were very critical, and often expressed a sense of disbelief that therankings—produced by journalists and statisticians with no expertise in legal education—were being taken seriously. Forexample, after USN published its first ranking issue in 1990, Guido Calabresi dean of Yale Law School (ranked number1) called the rankings “an idiot poll,” while Dean Robert Clark of Harvard (ranked number 5) pronounced them “MickeyMouse,” “just plain wacky,” and “totally bonkers” (cited in Parloff, 1998; Webster, 1992). As one administratordescribed his and his colleagues’ reaction to the initial rankings:The survey came and we sort of looked at it and said, “Isn’t this interesting, somebody’s doing a survey.” Andthen we probably filled it out and that was about it. And then all of the sudden some rankings came out and wewere in the top 25 which was a good thing for [our school]. It looked so crazy and arbitrary that we startedlaughing.The opinion of many deans and other administrators has remained critical. In 1997, Judith Wegner, then dean of theUniversity of North Carolina’s law school said, “U.S. News’ methodology is so seriously flawed that it makes anythinking person despair of journalistic ethics” (Rovella, 1997). Carl Monk, executive director of the Association ofAmerican Law Schools, called them “dangerous and misleading” (Cotts, 1998). Of the administrators we interviewed, amajority shared these criticisms—some vehemently:The reification of this stuff to the decimal point that makes it into “science” is what makes [rankings] sodestructive.We hate [rankings]. And we hate the [guide] book. And it comes out at the wrong time, and it has the wronginformation.I wish Al Qaeda would make USN their next target.It is important to note, however, that a minority of administrators believe that rankings have had a positive

Yes, I am referring to Brooklyn Law. I will direct you to this artcile http://www.top-law-schools.com/choosing-school-in-ny.html, which pretty much says even if you have a full ride at Touro, it is not worth going to. You say its not good being at the 5th ranked school in the market, well what does that make Touro.

BLS has a strong alumni base and a stronger reputation than Touro (which has either no reputation at large firms, or a poor one). I feel like, what is the point of wasting 3 years of my life in a school (however minimal the debt) to graduate and either not get a job, or a get a job paying 55k (which is what my friends who DIDNT go to law school are making right now). BLS is far from a guranteed Big Law or Mid Law spot, but at least it gets you in the game. Touro doesn't...I think

Seriously, look at the OCI employer list between the two. Top 10% you will have a shot at interviews with virtually all of the OCI employers at both schools. How different are the lists?

Firms don't take summer associates that they dont want to make offers to. The mentality that firms have is that they want to make offers to 100% of their summer associates. Even in this economy, its over 80% offers.

If you can get a summer job at roughly the same group of firms, probably better to save the money. If not, jump.

Yea there was an awesome website that literally listed the OCI employers at the school and it was pretty accurate. I cannot remember it though, which is of no use to anyone, but I do know it exists. I suppose you could just call the school, but they will fudge that information. Even if they got someone to come on campus they will call it an OCI interview even if the position was for an unpaid spot.

This is Brooklyn Law Schools numbers on Lawschooltransparency. 40% of the graduating class has listed their salaries. 10% make less than 70,000 which could mean they make minimum wage they don't have a minimum so I am always suspicious of that. Just assume that 10% is making 69k, because schools try to be as close to the truth about their numbers as possible. That means 40% of the class has a reported income. Brooklyn Cost 42k a year plus the cost of living for a year in Bedstuy, which is SCARY I am 6'8 and 260 pounds and I was scared walking around there at night you will be paying an additional 23k. Put that over two years 127K total to go to Brooklyn. This is collecting 8% interest don't forget. So more than 8,000 a year in interest payments will be headed your way.

Touro is 36K a year you are getting a 20k scholarship and not paying living expenses by living at home. So your debt assuming you don't get additional money will be 32K additional dollars to attend Touro. You will pay quite literally 100k more to go to a school that has a 40% employment rate. Do not forget the interest that collects on 100k. I mean 8,000 more in interest payments it will be in your life for quite some time and Brooklyn is the 5th best school in New York. Not to mention Harvard, Yale, Michigan, UCLA, USC, etc grads want to work in New York. Brooklyn is a decent school, but it won't open many more doors than Touro. It is nowhere the caliber of schools present in the New York Market and very few people outside of New York would know the difference between Touro or Brooklyn Law School.

I personally was in a similar situation to the one you are in and could have transferred to Hastings, but decided against it. I got an increased scholarship at my Tier 4 school, which I really like and have had some pretty cool jobs up to this point. I know people that have transferred to Santa Clara, USF, and Hastings some have done well others have not found an internship and one guy I know from undergrad went to GGU to start out transferred to Hastings and has been unemployed for a year now. This is because GGU, Hastings, USF, Santa Clara, are not IMPRESSIVE SCHOOLS. Employers want Stanford, Berkeley Grads in the area. Not to mention UCLA & USC grads move up to San Francisco as do Harvard, Yale, Colombia, NYU, etc. Going to the 48th, 78th, 93rd, or 114th school really is not going to impress anyone. I imagine if you are in the top 10% at Hastings you are set, but 90% chance you won't be and being the in top 40% at the 48th best school is not going to have employers knocking doors down for you. You are going to be sending resumes out just like the person in the top 40% at the 93rd best school.

Now with all the said Touro does have pretty minimal stats on lawschooltransparency. http://www.lawschooltransparency.com/clearinghouse/?school=touro it looks like only 8% of the students are accounted for, which might be the lowest I have seen. It is a tough decision, but Brooklyn is not a guarantee of anything and will cost you significantly more money than what you are paying. Either will work out, but take the money into consideration and also remember sometimes it is better to be the top student at a lower school than to be a mid level student at a decent school. Being in the top 5%-10% at any ABA school is impressive. Being the 232nd best student at the 63rd best school does not make you stand out.

Okay, firstly, I don't know where some people are getting there info but Brooklyn Law School is not in Bedstuy. It is in Brooklyn Heights (way west of Bed Stuy), which is a pretty affluent part of Brooklyn (1900 a month for one bedroom apartment). I'm not concerned about that in the slightest.

However, I did some research on OCI interviews. These figures are from lawschoolnumbers.com, so I can't attest to their veracity, but they seem pretty damn "jump worthy".

It is pretty close to Bedstuy I lived there. I got off on the G-Train right in front of it. It is not a nice area the courts are there, but it is not nice. I am sure Brooklyn Law School will sugarcoat it's location, but it is not a nice area of Brooklyn. It is a a few blocks from Bedstuy, and I remember it being in Bedstuy. I lived right around Brooklyn Law School and it is not a good area although, that was 3 years ago and things might have changed.

If you haven't I recommend visiting the school. It is possible I am way off base, but check things out for yourself first hand. Everything you read here from me or anyone else is essentially unfounded information and not really worth that much.

Lawschoolnumbers.com website I don't know how accurate that is. The information is from 2007-2008 prior to the huge recession and lawschoolnumbers.com has not updated this for any of the schools. Lawschoolnumbers.com is designed to determine admissions chances more than employment prospects. Transferring is a huge decision and you should do some real research instead of looking at these websites. If you transfer you are going to be paying Brooklyn Law School 100,000 so call Brooklyn law school and ask for a list of the employers they had come for OCI. Then look to see what positions were paid or not, also see which ones actually came to campus and were not just resume collections. Schools are not forthcoming with their information, but you are going to pay them 100,000 dollars so get first hand info. Go on facebook and find people attending Brooklyn Law School and ask them what the OCI situation really was. Every school in the Bay Area at least lists a ton of employers on their OCI schedule, but does not distinguish the fact that many of the positions are unpaid, or nothing more than resume collections. All these schools are business and you are customer paying a lot of money so get REAL INFO. Not lawschoolnumbers.com 2007-2008 OCI employers that were offering unpaid positions. Lawschoolnumbers.com did not go research this they just got the info from the schools who reported the facts in the light most favorable to them. I am just some random guy on the internet so don't take anything I say to seriously, but if you were paying 100k for anything else I would imagine you woudl make a few phone calls. If you were buying a house and the ad said great neighborhood, wonderful neighbors, blah blah you might make a few phone calls and visits to verify these statements when considering law schools the same logic applies.

On the same note see what Touro's schedule is, go into Touro's career service office and see what is going on with them. The real thing to consider is that very few students at non T-14 schools get employment through OCI anyway. Even if there are actually 80 employers coming to Brooklyn for OCI, I find it unlikely that all 80 firms actually hire someone through OCI. A firm coming in for interviews often is nothing more than professional courtesy, and some firms have no intention of hiring anyone, but they show up as a favor to the school. Not to mention there are 470 Graduates from Brooklyn compared to 199 from Touro. So even if they had more people coming for OCI the percentages are not great. 470 people graduating is a lot of students. The competition will be much higher for any position there. These are all things to consider and Brooklyn might be the better school in the long run, but it has 300 more graduates than Touro that they are trying to find jobs for. You will be competing for jobs with people from NYU, Colombia, Fordham, Cardozo, Georgetown, Harvard, Yale, etc the difference between Brooklyn and Touro when compared to these schools is nominal.

I just don't know how much OCI means for tier 2,3,4 schools. You need to be in the top 10% or 20% to even get interviewed. That is how it was for my school's OCI. Even being in the top 10% or 20% did not mean they were hiring you. They were here for 6 hours 30 minute blocks interviewing 12 people at my school alone, not to mention the numerous other schools they visit. These OCI's result in them interviewing 50 people for 1 maybe 2 spots. This results in a 1 in 50 or 1 in 25 chance of getting hired if you place in the top 10% or 20% of the class. Now at Georgetown, Harvard etc I don't imagine the above process applies. However, when firms interview at GGU they also go to USF, Santa Clara, Hastings. They will only allow the top 20% from each school to even apply. Then they will receive a few hundred applications and select 48 people to interview then offer one or two spots. Is having the opportunity to go through this process worth paying 100k more for? That is a question only you can answer.

At the end of they day there are great schools and respected regional schools, which I think Fordham falls under not even Cardozo quite as much. However, to pay 100k more to go to NYLS or Brooklyn law school the 5th and 6th best school in a saturated market doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Again, I am a random guy on the internet so take everything I saw with a major grain of salt, but the whole game U.S. News and the schools play of misrepresenting facts drives me crazy and I want people to be aware of them. Good luck to you whatever you decide.

I think that Brooklyn is definitely better in terms of employment prospects, but $40k better? Yikes! Are they the only place where you applied to transfer? Any chance you could continue to live at home and take the LIRR in?

As stated above I don't think Brooklyn the 5th/6th best school in completely saturated market is worth the 42,375 a year price tag. So 84,750 in tuition alone accumulating interest. 22k in living costs estimated 44k over two years. Grand total of 128k for two years.

Even if you don't get additional scholarship money you are going to pay at most 40K to get through Touro and be at the 7th best place in the overly saturated market. Is it worth $84,570 accumulating interest to move from 7th place to 5th? The answer is maybe, but the cost is definitely something to consider.